Working Title: Cultural Gaps:
From YKTTW
Fast Eddie: <bows down before the trope-fu of
Fanti Sci/> Seriously.
Monster entry.
Jordan: I'm not sure about the
Antigone entry- I agree that modern people probably consider it to have more to do with cvil disobedience and feminism than the original audience could have, but I think the negative interpretation of Creon is there in the play- particularly in the conversatiions with his son and Tiresias- actually, I think there's
Values Dissonance in that respecting the dead is more important to the play's morality than fighting tyrants.
Shay Guy:
Monster entry? Where?
Ununnilium:
- actualy, NO western countries share the no cousin intermarriage laws, the US is the only one that has such laws, and even then, only about half of the states have actual laws against it, while the stigma may exist in other nations, you will only realy notice complainers from the US when people discuss characters like this in anime, mostly because in nations where it is legal, the people there are generaly more accepting of something that has become legal that has a stigma against it.
First, it didn't say they shared the laws, it said it shared the stigma; second,
Conversation In The Main Page.
- Do you actually think that Brian told him he was trying to kill himself? Considering that his mother's response of "is this the first time or the last time, we're doing this" to his detention, I doubt it. Judging by how most people saw Brian before, they probably thought that "the brain" had brought the gun to school to show it off in a pathetic attempt to gain popularity. Or since it was a flare gun, they could have thought he was stealing athletic equipment. It's not like the principal seemed to be that observant, considering only four of the five kids have an actual reason to be there in the first place.
The dissonance isn't about the reason so much as the presence of the gun in the first place.
Later:
- Actually, now that you bring that up, it sounds a little familiar.
- 'cept Anakin didn't kill Padme, and (at least in the EU) the Jedi realized how stupid that rule was.
Oy.
Ununnilium: Taking out:
It's a hangover from dragon-horniness transferring over the mental link to the rider, if you want to get technical about it. Not that that makes it much less squicky, in a lot of cases—
...because, yes, that's how it works in-story, but that doesn't matter a whit to this trope.
Sukeban: "
The Marcus Didius Falco series of hardboiled detective stories set in Ancient Rome includes slavery and torture as a matter of course; the main character himself objects to slavery only when it results in poor treatment of the slave, and to torture purely because it produces bad intel. "
Well, that's a bit of historical accuracy. Honestly, if it makes you feel better, the ancients were equal opportunity, non-racist slavers. If anything, Falco is somewhat enlightened for his time, and a bit of a feminist to boot...
Ununnilium:
- Oh, and why is this in the Real Life section?
Conversation In The Main Page. And you could have just moved it to the
Anime section.
Also:
- This troper can see how Misa looks sexist, but Ray Penbar's fiance is probably the smartest non-main character on the show.
It's about Ray's actions towards his fiancee, not said fiancee's actions.
- But to be fair, it was a flare gun.
- If shot at someone, a flare gun would probably set them on fire. It would certainly be considered a lethal weapon.
Conversation In The Main Page, again.
Later:
- Uh, it WAS a flare gun, and it just blew up his locker (he didn't point it at anyone). Could be the admininstration "sweeping it under the rug" so they don't have to expel one of the "good" kids. Remember we only hear when a principal/school board acts like idiots, they aren't necessarily obligated to.
Do people not read the discussion page? Is that what it is? @@ I mean, you'd think when something disappears from the main page, you'd go over to the discussion page, at least to ask what happened.
Anyway. Definite CITMP. And while that's a possibility, it was never discussed or even mentioned in the film itself, as far as I know.
Dr Dedman: Well you keep chopping off all argument at the knees so it looks "empty". It's not an "evolving discussion" there's this big gap. People fill big gaps. You say it's a "gun" end of discussion, we say it's a "flare gun", it's dangerous but mostly just stupid/pathetic.
FWIW a flare gun doesn't look much like a real gun (not even a toy), if the poor slob HAD pulled it on someone they'd probably laugh (and then step out of the way). While it is dangerous, it's not really a weapon (no license needed, no restrictions etc). They probably labled it "an incindery device", gave him the minimum punishment and called it good. Not everything that gets brought to school gets found, and not every finding makes the news, a "nice" school like that one would probably do whatever they could to keep it off the news (and kicking out a kid with active/well off parents = making the news).
Ununnilium: That's because people aren't
discussing it, they're just tossing stuff up in the entry.
Anyway, yeah, but we don't see or hear about any of that actually happening
in this story. Still... how's this revision strike you?
Dr Dedman: Decent, my issue with the edits is you kept getting rid of "flare gun". Personally, there's no way in heck you could get a kid tried as an adult for that. Expelled, oh yeah, that could happen. Probably have to finish high school in some private "academy" or another, but no way does a juevenile with any backing at all do time for blowing up a locker.
As to all the suppositions (mine and others). [shrug] He's a sheltered kid, kids like that get away with stuff (or get off real lightly). Until they really flip out, usually a couple years into college, drop out and live near campus for the next ten years. Let's just say I knew a few guys like that, that kid is a piker.
Ununnilium: ...and someone took it back out again.
>>
Ununnilium:
- In the case of Kylara, however, it is made pretty clear that she is evil and crazy, thus also being a masochist is not beyond belief.
...did you
mean to imply that evil and insanity makes you more likely to be a masochist, or is that just me? @@
Ununnilium:
- Not to mention, Flatland was largely a satire of Victorian England.
...okay, but so? What does this mean?
Scifantasy: My point was that a satire, the parts of
Flatland which seem like
Values Dissonance might well be deliberately over the top and problematic...that is, Abbott may have intentionally made the women almost inhuman, to point out how Victorian England treated
its women.
Ununnilium: Ahhhh, a cogent point! Re-added and clarified.
AdamCuerden: Sorry that the Lovecraft quote required so much massaging and moving around the page - I've been a bit ill, and probably not as with it as I should be. But that's just so dissonant...
Jisu: Removed the
Beauty and the Beast bit, which, I see, has already been contested. In no common version of the story can I find an analogy to an abusive relationship, and I've tried. She hates him when he's mean, and only starts to even
like him once he's gotten over himself. The movie in particular, which was pointed out specifically, is as much his story of learning to be a good person as it is her story of finding her calling, and she only shows interest in him once he gets rid of his unrealistic expectations and anger issues.
bluepenguin:
Removed:
- It's been pointed out that another of his horrors, that of a change to the body, may be seen as horror when he wrote it but not so much now. "The Shadow over Innsmouth" is a good example. "I get to change into a water breather and live forever? Cool!" The film Dagon, based on the story, explicitly takes this point of view when the protagonist gets to join his love interest when he finds out he's changing too.
- Not to mention the story At The Mountains of Madness, in which wherever the word "penguin" appears, the adjective "grotesque" is there, too. Now, granted, these were giant albino mutant penguins, but still, there's really no way of making a frigging penguin scary.
That's not this trope, it's
Nightmare Retardant. Also, much as I love the phrase "Tentpeg of
Suddenly Sexuality," I rewrote that
Dragonriders Of Pern example so that it would actually be understandable to people who don't already know about the whole tentpeg debacle.
Antheia: I put the first one back in, because it does illustrate how values have changed - it's
Nightmare Retardant due to Values Dissonance. The penguins can't have been very frightening even in Lovecraft's days, though.
Ununnilium: I'd like to put the second one back in, for much the same reason. To us, penguins are emblematic of all that's cute about nature. In Lovecraft's day, they were just another way to emphasize the weirdness of the Antarctic.
Kizor: Pulled this one out - can someone who knows the applicable laws rework this so that we don't need the "this editor" stuff?
- This editor is always bemused by the high minimum legal drinking age portrayed in US media (21 I think), and Aesops that "Beer is evil" or the like. Here in the UK, while only over 18s can buy the stuff, it is legal to drink at younger ages - it used to be that you could drink alcohol in a pub at 16, or at 14 if with a meal. (Not sure if that's still true now or not.) Some of my relatives even insist that introducing alcohol in a controlled fashion when young encourages responsible drinking - but they're French, giving a thrid perspective on the issue.
Ununnilium: Not unless there's a media example we can apply it to.
Chandagnac: Alright. I'll take that challenge. Do examples from the News count?
How about the trial of Louise Woodward? She was a British Au Pair who was accused and later convicted of the murder of the (American) child she was supposed to be minding. During her trial the Prosecution used Louise's history of going out to clubs and drinking alcohol as examples of her poor moral character, disregarding the fact that such behaviour is common and perfectly legal in 19-year old women in Britain.
They were on firmer ground with their claim that Ms. Woodward had used fake I.D.s to get into clubs and drink alcohol in the USA.
Anyway, it was made clear that what people found to be acceptable/expected behaviour in a woman in America was vastly different from the British ideal/ reality, and a lot of British people complained that
Values Dissonance had led to the conviction of a woman they believed to be innocent. (Ahh, trial by
Sky News, heh.)
Ununnilium: Works for me!
Ununnilium:
- There's also the whole thing about the refusal to acknowledge what happened at Nanking.
That's not Values Dissonance, that's cultural shame/historical revisionism. Believe me, it happens in every nation.
Solandra: Huh. When my English class got to the story in the
The Canterbury Tales about the Jew and the holier-than-thou child, my teacher claimed that it was actually a satire on anti-Semitism, designed to fly under the radar of the anti-Semitics in Chaucer's day. I guess people prefer to pass off
Unfortunate Implications in classics as being not the actual intent of the author, because classics can't contain
any offensive material. And Shakespeare's
The Taming of the Shrew becomes a satire on gender roles, because a highly influential writer like Shakespeare simply can't be misogynist.
Ununnilium: ...so how do you know that your English teacher's wrong and we random people on the Internet are right? `-`
Solandra:
Quality By Popular Vote? Except when it doesn't apply, of course. Our imaginations tend to muck that up in the spaces authors leave for us.
Unnamed Newb: I'll just throw in that given the structure of the story, probably nothing in the Tales should be taken at face value without good evidence. The travelers are all the very definition of unreliable narrators, most of them aren't very nice to boot, and the host, who provides the rest of the text, is just as bad because he considers them all to be fine and good despite all the evidence that would convince even people at the time that these guys were asses. And idiots. And sometimes both raised to several powers. But this is all pretty much moot anyway, since the question is whether the views in the story are alien to us but would be familiar to contemporary readers. As far as I can tell the answer is yes, since it was added as an example here. It doesn't much matter whether Chaucer intended us to agree or not.
Ununnilium:
- A different short manga story features a girl who can communicate with ghosts, who learns that a boy has been haunting her school since the '60s. It seems that the school's choir was supposed to sing in celebration of her engagement, but the boy was so smitten with his teacher that he angrily ran out of class and into the street, where he was hit by a car and died; the choir subsequently disbanded. The girl agrees to help him just to get rid of him. For some reason the class is violently opposed to having a school choir, to the point of tearing up the girl's posters and defacing her seat, and the abuse only gets worse when she admits she can see ghosts (adults, naturally, are completely useless). The bullying only stops when the ghost causes all the windows to shatter because he was enraged at her classmates; this proves his existence but also makes him susceptible to the dark side. The apparent moral is "Don't stand out in class ever, unless you've got a really good reason" and, since the boy got reincarnated, "if you really love him, the difference betwen kindergarten (him) and 7th grade (her) is nothing."
...okay, I don't see where this "apparent moral" is coming from. It just seems like a typical school tale of adversity. You get the main character in trouble, but her pure heart carries her through, and she's vindicated in the end.
arromdee: I deleted this because it was obviously out of place, but I couldn't tell where it belonged.
- As well, it was played as only natural that the daughter in her early teens would be married off to a boy in his early 20s... particularly uncomfortable in a room full of girls of the same age as said female character, who had spent 2 years rooting for her and taking her on as a favourite character and possibly the Only Sane Girl in the whole thing. Squick.
Where is this:
It's also mentioned that it happens to other men, too, if their dragons choose to have sex. Afterwards, the men are turned gay, due to the author's explicitly stated belief that anything being inserted into a man's anus will permanently make him homosexual. Seriously.
I believe it's there, I just can't remember reading it ever.
What's the phrase for when an
imaginary society is created with values different from ours?
Guys, changing the entry for
jihad to one that is very misleading (jihad as a generic "struggle" is the line fed by terrorist sympathizers, not what it actually means) doesn't change facts..
Same for crusade. Deleting the little fact that
crusades were made in response to centuries of Islamic conquest by the sword doesn't change that discussing the term crusade without mentioning that fact is like mentioning WWII without talking about who was in charge of Germany.
Ununnilium: So, Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions is a terrorist sympathizer? I see...
And we could argue who's responsible for what for pages upon pages, but that doesn't change the fact that the line doesn't belong in this entry. It has nothing to do with the example; it's a
Justifying Edit, pure and simple.
Ununnilium:
- Suicide is considered to be the Ultimate Sin in Catholicism, and in Most Western Region, while in Japan - they even had a helpful 'Suicide for Dummies' book published - and it was considered a viable option if one has become an 'utter failure'.
It "was considered a viable option" decades ago.
- I think that in a novel centering around the difference between lawful and good, and coming down very firmly on the "good" side, the interpretation that he was killed to "redeem" him doesn't hold water, particularly given Javert's character arc.
It's an interpretation that you can agree or disagree on. Wether or not you
do agree doesn't belong on here, though.
- Possibly just a television convention. This (American) troper would accept it in a TV show as expected and cliche, but can't imagine it taking place in real life (at least, at a level more than "are you holding up OK? If you want to ever talk...").
- Oh, it can, on occasion, happen in Real Life in America. Yes, it usually would just be "Are you holding up okay?" But if the person being asked is the sort who wants to keep it private (and Temperance Brennan would probably qualify), some people would escalate the invasion of privacy for that exact reason, as they think people who keep such things to themselves will go insane. This is life imitating art...
Conversation In The Main Page.
- To make this more meta, this Russian troper had experienced Values Dissonance quite often while reading this page.
- As does this Asian troper, who thinks cousin relations aren't as bad as it is oh-so-often hyped out to be.
- And this English troper, who is starting to suspect western may be more accurately read as American. The making a lot of noise in public places bit, yeah generally associated with eccentrics or highly rude people. Woe betide you should you dare speak loudly or eat on any form of public transport.
- Might as well amend that to 'North American'. This troper, a Canadian, has been known to occasionally eat on the bus, and definitely talk loudly (occasionally to be heard over the bus itself).
Note these things as actual dissonance in the places where they fit.
Antheia: Cut:
- But the story implies that Deep Ones aren't just humans who look strange and breathe water; their strange appearance is a Red Right Hand which comes with a compulsion to serve Dagon rather than to act as a free being, and the change is initially involuntary. What good is living forever if you're a biologically programmed slave? Are you even really still you if your entire personality has been rewritten?
Those are interesting points on
The Shadow over Innsmouth, but they don't have anything to do with this trope.
Robert: They're relevant since they cast considerable doubt on the extent to which
The Shadow over Innsmouth is an example of the trope. Leave both sides in, or cut both out.
Antheia: That would be
Discussion In The Main Page. If you don't agree with the example, edit it out. If someone else disagrees, they can put it back in again. Alternatively, work both sides into the entry without making one seem like a reply to the other.
Robert: I'm removing the entry. Just deleting one side of the argument is obviously one-sided, and the fact that there is an argument means it's not a good example of values dissonance. The deleted bit is:
- Another of his horrors, that of a change to the body, might have terrified when he wrote. These days, not so much. "The Shadow over Innsmouth" is a good example. "I get to change into a water breather and live forever? Cool!" The film Dagon, based on the story, explicitly takes this point of view the protagonist gets to join his love interest when he finds out he's changing too.
The film
Dagon apparently ignored the real downside of the transformation - typical
Adaptation Decay. External forces rewriting your personality fall under mind control, if not mind rape. I consider it a fate worse than death. Worse, the victims end up as loyal minions of a
Cosmic Horrror, which is going to destroy all humanity when the stars are right. For most people, that alone would be a deal breaker, if they thought it through.
Robert: Trimmed some of the conversations, and remove the 'niggard' comments. That's an example
Have A Gay Old Time. The various comments on Japanese-American culture clash might be better spun off to a new page. Speaking of which, I've read an antropological study which said that the English and Japanese codes of manners are pretty similar beneath the surface, and near diametrically opposed to that of the US. Apparently, both England and Japan put respecting other's privacy, not bothering them, etc, above showing an interest in other people, being friendly, etc, which is why Americans will supposedly tell complete strangers their full medical history while the English (and the Japanese) can work with someone for thirty years and still not know a thing about them. Of course, no country is uniform, and cultures keep on changing, but there does seem to be some truth in this.
Ununnilium:
- The Gonne's shown to be as corrupting, if not more so, than a sentient, formless being of unending rage by the time of Thud!. Anvilicious.
- Nobby's imitation of Eddie Murphy's signature trick when bluffing his way into the armory in Men At Arms isn't exactly friendly either, as Nobby's been disqualified from the human race for shoving, but this particular one is less obvious.
The first one:
Discussion In The Main Page. The second: ...I don't get it.
Tanto: I guess it's supposed to be racial, equating Nobby and a black guy?
Ununnilium: ...yeah, that's stretching.
Ununnilium:
- All porn, ever. One man's nosebleed inducer is another man's squick.
This is not this trope. At all. In so many ways.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut and placed here until someone explains why this is
Values Dissonance, rather than simple
Squick. It just came out, remember.
- In the recent film Wanted the final showdown is preceded by a massive Rat Bombing, yes the use of small furry animals as mobile munitions. To make things worse when one rat bomb is discovered just prior to the mass detonation we are treated to a slow motion view of the rat being flung thought the air and as the timer counts down to zero it looks at the camera and squeaks as if knowing its fate.
Antheia: Looks like somebody got this trope and
Moral Dissonance mixed up — I could see what happens in the example as cruelty to animals.
Shini: Corrected a few errors in the Sherlock Holmes example, it wasn't Holmes that was into phrenology, it was the client and it was treated with Ridicule by the narrator. Also added the unfortuate examples from The Yellow Face and The Mazarian Stone
Barano: Deleted the Ouran example, because wow, way to misunderstand the point. (The point being, "If you're a slight girl who doesn't know any self-defense and can't even swim, then don't pick a fight with two guys twice your size right next to the sea; you may not care about gender differences but the guys
will be stronger and you
will end up in danger." People like to forget that Haruhi didn't have to take on the two guys herself - the rest of the club, all the guests and all those
security guys were pretty close, she could've just called help instead of heroically trying to fight off the offenders.)
Daibhid C: I don't understand how the McCain oven chips advert is an example. It's a very silly ad, but how is it
Values Dissonance?
Psychotic Loner: Because nowadays food advertises being fat free.
Daibhid C: But advertising chips as being fat free would be downright lying, so they advertise them as having
less fat (either than normal chips or than they used to, I can't remember).
Psychotic Loner: Exactly, so advertising with such a "high" fat level as 5% is abhorrent to modern senses. Then again, this may not be what the post is about at all, in which case, "huh?" indeed.
Daibhid C: I should probably mention the advert's from about two years ago. In fact, I suspect it was current when it was added.
Antheia: I don't know enough about this show to tell if it should be mentioned as an example or not, but it looks like it might not fit, and, well,
Conversation In The Main Page:
- Late Night with Conan O'Brien likes to play with this one. The 'ghost' of a 1940s singer named Artie Kendall who used to preform in the days when the studio had a radio show would appear and sing three songs. The topic of the first song topic varies, but the last two are always about women (subservient) and Irish (angry drunks) people. Conan always says they are horrible songs and he once added "I'm surprised you weren't murdered!" to which the ghost replied "I was murdered." One example I can remember:
"Oh women were not put on Earth to think
They were made to iron clothes and clean the sink
If they say they want careers
Reach across their shapely rears
And put a tranquilizer in her drink
Drug-ady dame"
- Actually, his songs wouldn't have gone over too well even in his era, especially his songs about World War II, which probably would have gotten him arrested for treason if he'd really performed them back then. Consider this one:
"Oh, let's surrender to the Germans right away
And listen to what Hitler has to say
And let's tell ol' Hirohito
That to serve him would be neato
There's no way we can beat them anyway
Bodili-boom"
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Cut this (after editing, unfortunately) and put it here. This isn't
Values Dissonance; this is
Compressed Vice.
- In one episode of Hawaii Five-O, McGarrett was initially opposed to the idea of an woman acting as an undercover agent. Yet, oddly, in other episodes of the same vintage, he had no problem with the idea.
Psychotic Loner: I don't think this is sexist at all. Nomad didn't know why Uhura would sing for fun, and therefore she must be defective. Spock's comment was more out of anger that Uhura was referred to as a "unit." Replace the word "woman" with "human" and I think the statement would mean the same thing.
Anonymous Mc Cartneyfan: Then why didn't Spock
say "human"? It's not like any full humans are rational to him...
- Before the 1970s, there was this idea floating around that women were, by nature, less rational than men. TV shows from that era, from I Love Lucy on, used this idea a lot; but it's Values Dissonance now. Spock using "woman" instead of "human" is putting that values system where it doesn't logically belong...
Jordan: I agree that there was likely a sexist implication- I remember a line from
Stranger in a Strange Land from the same period where Michael, the human raised as a Martian comments (when he was still very naive about humanity) about woman being a "female man". Similarly, the character saying the line doesn't understand humans in general, but it doesn't stop it from being sexist. At the very least, the Spock line certainly belongs under
Unfortunate Implications.
Seven Of Diamonds: I watched the episode and in context the line didn't seem sexist at all. Spock wasn't explaining why Uhura's mind was chaotic, he was defending her by telling the robot not to call her a unit.
It would be sexist if said like this:
Spock: That unit is a woman.
But he says it like this:
Spock: That "unit" is a woman.
Some Guy: Removed the section on
Its a Mad Mad World because it's misleading. The reason one of the proposals is "each man gets a share" is because the men were the ones who were there when the guy died and heard where the treasure was buried- it's not
just because they're men. The reason the old hag gets harped upon so often is more because she's an
Evil Mother In Law than because she's a woman. It's also worth noting that the "each person gets a share" idea
is implemented in the near-final electoral college style proposal, before the breakdown. They divide it into seventeen pieces. One for each person (eight), one for each person who was there when the guy died (five), one for each vehicle (four).
amusingly, at the end of the movie there are exactly seventeen people clamoring for the treasure, which means that they all would have gotten a lot more money if they didn't go "Everyone for themselves!"
The Other Professor
removed:
- Red states and blue states (conservatives and liberals) in the United States have dramatically different interpretations of events, helped along by each side going to their preferred source of news and interpretation. Some of the most significant are differing attitudes about the acceptability of torture, unrestricted power in the executive branch, guilt by association, the validity of preemptive war, and unquestioning loyalty to country's leaders, right or wrong.
Due to
Complaining About Political Viewpoints You Dont Like
- The ads for this page consisted of 2 asian dating sites and a "Vote Cthulhu" ad. Awesome
Kizor: I can't make head or tails of this thing. Could someone who's familiar with
Bones turn this text-block-o-doom from a conversation to an example
(yes, we're allowed to edit other peoples' work in articles) and stick it back in? Alternately, it's fine where it is: on the discussion page, as a discussion.
- The premiere episode of Bones, has several characters question main character Brennan about how she is dealing with her parents' murder, and admonish her for not sharing her feelings about it. In Australia, where more emphasis is culturally placed on privacy, even asking such personal questions would be considered incredibly rude behavior.
- And in many other countries besides. Americans wearing their hearts on their sleeves is a common source of values dissonance for viewers from more private cultures, who wonder that the daws don't peck at them.
- The daws do peck at them. Why do you think so many American shows have episodes about not mistreating or retaliating against The Libby? Americans who wear their hearts on their sleeves hope that maybe the daws can be baptized into cardinals or peacocks or something...
- Can we get some British to American translation here? Daws? Peck? What?
- I'm British born and bred and I'm honestly just as baffled. It reminds me of some of the archaic slang my Grandmother uses, which is almost unintelligible at times. On the subject of my Grandmother's slang, some of it is an example of this phenomenon; when trying to get one of my younger cousins to share his toys, she told him to "be a Nig-Nog", and was completely, utterly unaware of the possible racial connotations.
- It's from Shakespeare, apparently — Othello to be specific:
For, sir,
It is as sure as you are Roderigo,
Were I the Moor, I would not be Iago:
In following him, I follow but myself;
Heaven is my judge, not I for love and duty,
But seeming so for my peculiar end:
For when my outward action doth demonstrate
The native act and figure of my heart
In complement extern, 'tis not long after
But I will wear my heart upon my sleeve
For daws to peck at: I am not what I am
And a daw is a crow. So apparently the origin of "heart upon my sleeve" implies it's not a good idea to wear it there, but then it's from Iago, so you can't really trust it.
Nornagest: Cut —
* Faith, the main character from
Mirror's Edge, is an Asian woman designed by a Western artist. A Japanese fan redesigned the character to be more in line with the Japanese standards of beauty; the end result is larger breasts and "whiter" looking facial features. The comparison can be seen
here◊.
This has nothing to do with moral values, and sexual tastes differ enough between individuals that the opinion of one Japanese fan means nothing.
This too —
***Also, the US military tends to have a large presence of people who could charitably be described as zealous homophobes with guns and military training, who can and have been life threatening hazards to those in the military that have come out, making the "don't ask don't tell" policy more of a protection than a repression.
***Note that the preceding comment shows values dissonance in itself, between what people think the military thinks, and what the military itself thinks (recent polls shows an overwhelming majority of military personnel have no problem with gay troops, but the higher ups in the military believe there's enough radical hatred in the military that it could cause issues.).
Borderline flamebait, but definitely violates the
Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment. I'm more inclined to believe the latter comment, but neither one is a necessary, useful, or funny addition.
Insanity Prelude: I was going to start taking out some of the
I Am Not Making This Up potholes in the interest of keeping the trope itself around, but. You know what? Anne
Mc Caffrey and her tent pegs are one place where this trope
deserves to be invoked.
And the example about Sakura and Ino strikes me more as "preteens being stupid about friendships" than Values Dissonance, really, but I'll leave it in. :)
Daibhid C:
I'm not sure about this:
- Still, in the novel The Truth, firearms are, by then, illegal, but Mr. Pip has what amounts to a spring loaded pistol. Legally this is considered a crossbow, however the book says that if he was caught with this weapon by the police, his unofficial punishment for having it would be worse than the official one of owning a firearm.
As far as I recall, there's nothing in
The Truth about firearms being illegal, or about firearms at all; the assumption is they're still an Official Secret known only to the Assassins' Guild and characters directly involved in
MAA. Legally, the springbow is illegal;
technically it's just a crossbow, but its high power and concealability put it on the official "unlawful weapon" list of both the Watch and the Assassins. The Assassins' Guild punishment ("having its ability to be concealed on the human body tested to extremes") is arguably worse than the official punishment (hanging), which might be what the troper's thinking of.
Cambias: edited the entry on color issues in Brazil to remove the reference to American politicians using Obama's race to attack him. The recent campaign was notable for the way his opponents studiously avoided
mentioning Obama's racial background.
Crowley: The last three examples in the Anime section are...missing the point, to say the least. Permission to delete?
Antheia: I cut them just now. Cut the
Peanuts example too, for the same reason.
Landstander: Cut all the stuff on wrestling
Pro Wrestling around the world varies according to perception and style, and wrestlers who work in multiple countries tend to adapt their style to the local brand:
- In America, at its high-points (in the 50's during television's infancy, the 80's "Hulkamania" era, and the Monday Night Wars era) it was considered a addictive, but cheesy soap opera. At worst, it's a sideshow (at times, literally). Big time wrestling (read: WWE and TNA) tend to be heavily scripted, with emphasis on storyline and "high spots" (big stunts and signature moves).
- In Japan, "Puroresu" is given the same Serious Business respect as legitimate sports, and its participants are considered true athletes. Matches tend to be less scripted and feature more "real world" fighting moves. (Strike-type finishers like punches, kicks, and elbow strikes are common). It's not uncommon in Puroresu bouts for one opponent to immediately get up from the other's finisher and deliver his own, or for someone to have to hit his signature move three or four times to win.
- In Mexico and other parts of Latin America, Lucha Libre is Serious Business. Masked "luchadores" consider their masks and personas sacred and it's rare to see such a wrestler appear in public, sans mask... Indeed, performers who "lose" their masks in America, especially during a stint in WWE, will often be booed or attacked upon returning to their home country, regardless of heel/face nature. The action also tends to be more fast paced, with an emphasis on acrobatics and high flying moves. Power wrestlers are almost always heels (bad guys).
- Europe tends to split the difference between America and Japan: The shows are storyline-centered, but the in-ring action tends to be more reality based (lots of amateur wrestling and brawling-type moves.)
... this has nothing to do with values!
- Freezer: Umm... How several culture see the same pseudo-sport isn't an example of values? Really? Replacing.
- Landstander: I'm just not seeing it, I mean is EVERY single cultural difference really Values Dissonance? It's not "values" in the sense of what this trope is originally about, where something from a different era or culture is likely to offend someone due to a different value system, this is just something that's different across cultures. The Mexican example is the only one that fits with the page, in terms of "whats normal in America- removal of masks- upsets Mexican wrestling fans"
Big T: This trope used to have a section that implied that the US was not an industrialized country because it indulged in patriotism. I'm pretty sure even non-patriotic people would find that insulting.
Also, the following isn't an example, as there is no dissonance:
- In American college football, the Florida-Georgia game has long been known as the "World's Largest Outdoor Cocktail Party." But university and conference officials are trying to downplay the name, so as not to send the wrong message about alcohol. The boozing at the game is still legendary, however. Not to mention the avalanche of beer commercials you'll be exposed to if you watch it on television.
- Similarly, the universities of Tennessee and Kentucky used to play for a trophy called the Beer Barrel, but it was retired and never spoken of again after a Kentucky player was killed in a drunk driving accident.
—-
Removed Borat, since that's more
Crosses The Line Twice than
Values Dissonance.
Kilyle: Happy July 4th btw! Anyway, um... I was just trying to figure out how to word this, and couldn't figure out how to do so, so maybe someone else could. The point I want to add (either in the description or in the "real life" area) is something I realized while reading X-Men (Ultimate X-Men?) the other day. Nightcrawler, in that continuum, is against homosexuality and also an apparent homophobe (the two are distinct!). Now, I think I missed part of the story here, but it seems like Nightcrawler goes from "can't stand to be around homosexuals" to "creepy stalker and kidnapper and liar" disturbingly fast, in such a manner that I read it as "anyone who believes homosexuality is wrong
has to be a villainous sort and can't
possibly be a heroic sort."
So I wanted to make the point, somewhere on this page, that if you're a writer dealing with a controversial topic (such as homosexual rights), you need to be careful to remember that a person who holds an opinion opposite to your own can still be a good person. I mean, if a person murders someone, you might be reasonable to expect he'd do other crimes as well... but if a guy opposes gay marriage, that doesn't mean that he's the sort who would gun gays down in the street. And if a person believes there's nothing wrong with abortion, that doesn't mean that she's the sort who would beat and neglect her own children. This is especially important to remember when dealing with comics or other large-cast, large-readership (or viewership) works with multiple authors, because you don't want to take a beloved character and saddle them with a controversial opinion that half the readers are gonna hate, let alone make them
the fall guy for that week's Aesop about how hating gays makes you
slide your way to
Arson Murder And Jaywalking.
Matthew The Raven: It could just be a way of showing that he has some messed up views of sexuality. His extreme homophobia (and yes, not wanting to be around gay people
at all is a very creepy, very dangerous attitude, because it's not far from a violent outburst) could easily be tied to the same sort of psychosexual hang-ups and views on gender roles that would lead to stalking.
Someone who just opposes gay marriage? Not likely to go on an anti-gay rampage. Someone who "can't stand being around homosexuals" to the point of revulsion? Quite a bit more.
But yeah, we should have something about the changing face of heroism. In the 2000s, a heroic figure can't be a bigot - in the old days, it was fine, and even a positive trait. Look at Bulldog Drummond.
I Like Crows: Restored lines I managed to delete. If someone could tell me how the hell I managed to delete something I wasn't touching I'd be extremely thankful.
I Like Crows: Removed some of the new edits since they were either
missing the point of the trope,
justified edits, and/or just plain confusing. To name one example, I fail to see what relationships in China have to do with people being creeped out by
Frodo lusting after Esmeralda.
Nornagest: Cut —
** Something people need to understand about the Pern series is the nature of its setting. The 'dragons' the titular dragonriders ride? They're usually the more easygoing, more submissive half of the partnership, EXCEPT when mating is involved. It's bad enough when you have fire lizards, whose compulsions can theoretically be overriden. But when you're dealing with dragons, then it's overwhelming.
Mc Caffrey herself
notes that F'lar is incredibly frustrated with his relationship with Lessa at first, because "unless the dragon was involved, it might as well have been rape", which is pretty much what it would be, EXCEPT Ramoth was going for it full force, and Lessa was simply along for the ride. Later on, when F'lessan (their one son) goes after Tai because Zaranth is
glowing, he frantically asks her to "Choose this". Jaxom's the only one that's not affected by this in the least, because Ruth is [[Asexual not very interested in other dragons that way]].
*** Jaxom was affected, second-hand. He caught the emotions of the other dragons through Ruth. Ruth didn't give a crap. Jaxom had Ruth fly him to his paramour's hold so he could go caveman on her. Seems to tie into the Kylara thing that Jaxom was
Squicked both by the fact that he lost control like and just took what he wanted and that his lover reacted positively to it.
The excuses Anne
Mc Caffery came up with matter not in the slightest.
* In the Western world, ghosts are generally assumed to not be intentionally malicious, unless they already were in life, and are just trying to resolve whatever issue binds them to the world of the living. In Japan, it's generally assumed that they're malicious by very nature, with the occasional exception. This can make films like
The Ring or games like
Fatal Frame, where ghosts try to kill innocent people for no obvious reason, come across as strange to Western audiences.
** Not to mention the fact that
Stringy Haired Ghost Girl preys upon anyone, but not her killer.
*** Which is why the Western
Stringy Haired Ghost Girl like F.E.A.R's Alma, very
first thing she does when free is kill her killer and has a reason for killing people, making her a Woobie
Superstitions don't really matter here.
Dentaku: I am deleting this:
- I don't think Kyouya actually was going to rape her, he just pretended to. And it wasn't just because she "wasn't feminine enough," it was also because she put herself in danger trying to fight some thuggish guys, and the Host Club was worried about her. Also, I think the reason for Kyouya coming in was they were trying to tell her that gender does matter in some situations, because she didn't see it as mattering at all, and they may have wanted her to be aware of what those thugs could've done with her if they had caught her and found out she was a girl. Granted, that probably has Values Dissonance too, but I think some of the issue is that Tamaki (and some of the other Host Club members) like more feminine girls, and they're kind of torn between wanting to see Haruhi look more girlish and having her be one of the hosts in her disguise, and in that episode they were trying to find out her weakness, too.
Kyouya and Tamaki could have shown worry for Haruhi's tendency to pick a fight, without
sexually harassing her or putting her down for her gender. Just replace Haruhi with a
boy to see what I mean. And no, it really doesn't matter whether Kyouya only
pretended to want to rape Haruhi: it's very threatening and therefore still sexual harassment, pure and simple.
The core of the matter is that Kyouya and Tamaki act as sexist pigs without being called up on it. Their whole behavior is considered fair game, since Haruhi is female.
I Like Crows: Okay, what Kyouya did? Fair game, that is
Values Dissonance. However, Tamaki? The guy was ready to attack Kyouya for just standing beside Haruhi while being shirtless - had he walked in just a minute earlier he'd kill him. I fail to see where you're getting this whole "Tamaki condones sexuall harrasment!" from.
Dentaku: Tamaki puts Haruhi down for being a girl. She condones the harassment herself by keeping quiet about it, which is considered right since a girl shouldn't complain about that kind of stuff after all.
I Like Crows: In other words,
you haven't watched the show. Tamaki daydreams about Haruhi being more feminine but guess what? 1. Wanting someone to be more feminine =/= "sexual harrasment is A-OK!" and 2. he's constantly mocked for those daydreams by everyone else, and put down or ignored by Haruhi.
I'm wondering where you're getting the whole "girl shouldn't complain" from. Yes, Haruhi not reporting Kyouya is iffy, which is why I left that part in the entry. However, nowhere is it even implied this is because "girls shouldn't complain about it". She says outright in the episode she wasn't afraid because she knew he wouldn't do it, so it's safe to assume she didn't report him for the same reason.
Dentaku: Of course I watched the show, and I took the message rather personally; being quite agender-liberated female myself I would have raised all hell in Haruhi's position. It looks like the people on
TV Tropes also think it's fine when a girl gets sexually harassed and put down for her gender, so in the end it's debatable whether there's
values dissonance to begin with. The sentiment expressed here matches perfectly well with the one in the series after all.
I Like Crows: Where are the people who agree with what Kyouya did? Or thinks that it's okay to put down girls and/or sexually harass them? And that they shouldn't complain or report the harassers? I sure as hell haven't been saying that - I said what Kyouya did was an example of
Values Dissonance, remember? Just because I don't agree with you what the message of the series is doesn't mean I agree with said message.
You claim Tamaki puts Haruhi down because of her gender and the message of the series is that this is okay. By "put down" I take it you mean "to criticize", "to belittle" and/or "to humiliate" and that Haruhi doesn't do anything about it rather than just ignoring him. This immediately disqualifies the scene at the beach, because 1. the main point of Tamaki's rant wasn't "you're a girl act like one" but "you're a girl who faced two brutes what where you thinking"; 2. Haruhi gets mad at him and proceeds to ignore him (which is shown to be a punishment for him); and 3. the others asks her to apologize for being
reckless and nothing else.
So where in the series are the examples of the sentiment you claim it has?
Angermyode: One may consider it as little more than a handwave, but the New International (Catholic) Version of the Bible has this little passage that may be noteworthy on the matter of Values Dissonance:
"Sometimes inspired searching for meaning leads to conclusions which cannot be qualified as revelations from God. Think of the "holy wars" of total destruction, fought by the Hebrews when they invaded Palestine. The search for meaning in those wars centuries later [i.e. when the Bible was written] was inspired, but the conclusions which attributed all those atrocities to the command of God were imperfect and provisional"
I Like Crows: Removed this:
- Keep in mind that this happened shortly after she had been unconscious for hours after beaten and nearly drowned by the thugs
Because the only completely true thing was that she almost drowned. She took one hit in the manga, and in both versions she's fully consious after she's been rescued. What Kyouya did
is Values Dissonance, no need to make up things to make him worse.
Removed:
- Something which always provokes a gasp whenever people who have only seen the Baz Luhrman film read Romeo and Juliet: Romeo kills Paris, for absolutely no reason. While his murder of Tybalt can be (very shakily) justified, poor Paris is simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. It would seem Shakespeare's contemporaries would have no trouble whatsoever with this; modern adaptations always omit it as it makes Romeo seem far less sympathetic (ironically, the line by the Prince at the end about losing "a brace of kinsman" is usually kept, even though Paris' death is excluded, thus making Mercutio the only kinsman he lost.)
First of all, this isn't really an example of Values Dissonance. Second, the text of the play makes it clear that it's far from
for absolutely no reason. Paris saw Romeo going to Juilet's tomb and assumed that Romeo must be there to do some kind of mischief (because Romeo's a Montague). So Paris draws his sword and
attacks Romeo. In the ensuing swordfight, Romeo kills Paris in self-defense. Of course, since Romeo was going to kill himself anyway, it is kind of stupid, but the play is a
tragedy almost entirely based on
Finagles Law; Fate has it in for
everyone.
